Stanislaus Implement & Hardware Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 22, 1950

92 N.L.R.B. 897 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of STANISLAUS IMPLEMENT & HARDWARE COMPANY,
EMPLOYER and DISTRICT LODGE No. 41, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER
Case No. 2O-RC-1068
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF
REPRESENTATIVES
December 22, 1950
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election issued by the
National. Labor Relations Board on October 31, 1950, an election by
secret ballot was conducted under the direction and supervision of the
Regional Director for the Twentieth Region. Upon the conclusion-
of the balloting, a tally of ballots was issued and served upon the
parties hereto. The tally shows that of the 30 ballots cast, 15 were
cast in favor of and 14 against the Petitioner, and 1 ballot was chal-
lenged by the Petitioner.
As the challenged ballot was sufficient to affect the result of the"
election, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and, there-
after, on November 15, 1950, issued and served upon the parties his
report on challenged ballot, recommending that the challenge to
the ballot be sustained. On November 24, 1950, the Employer filed
exceptions to this report.
In his report the Regional Director found that the challenged
ballot was cast by Edmond Zimmerman, a nephew of the Employer's
president-general manager and of its vice president. The Regional
Director's recommendation that the challenge to Zimmerman's bal-
lot be sustained was based upon his close relationship to these officials.
In its exceptions the Employer admits Zimmerman's relationship to
the foregoing officials but asserts that he has no social contact with
them and works under conditions identical with those of the other
eligible employees. The Employer contends that for these reasons
and because the Act does not provide for the exclusion from bargain-
ing units of employees with close family relationship to management,
the challenge to Zimmerman's ballot should be overruled and the
ballot counted.
92 NLRB No. 155.
897
;898 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
While the Act does not expressly provide for the exclusion from
bargaining units of employees who are closely related to management,.
.Section 9 (b) of the Act does impose on the Board the function of
determining in each case the unit appropriate for the purpose of
collective bargaining. In the exercise of this function the Board
:traditionally excludes from the appropriate unit those employees
who do not have a sufficient interest in common with the other em-
ployees to warrant their inclusion therein. The Board, early in its
history, decided that close relatives of management officials do not
:appropriately belong in a unit of rank-and-file employees because such
relationship sufficiently distinguishes their interests from those of
the other employees to warrant their exclusion from the unit 1 We
have continued this policy and in several recent cases have excluded
nephews of management officials from bargaining units 2 Accord-
ingly, we find that Zimmerman was not eligible to vote and sustain
the'challenge to his ballot.
As it appears from the tally of ballots that the Petitioner has
.secured a majority of the valid votes cast, we shall certify it as the
,collective bargaining representative of the employees in the appro-
priate unit.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
IT IS ]HEREBY CERTIFIED that District Lodge No. 41, International
Association of Machinists has been designated and selected by a ma-
jority of the employees in the unit found appropriate in the Decision
.and Direction of Election herein, as their representative for the pur-
pose of collective bargaining and that, pursuant to Section 9 (a)
.of the Act, as amended, the said organization is the exclusive repre-
-sentative of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employ-
ment, and other conditions of employment.
1 Louis Weinberg Associates, Incorporated, 13 NLRB 66 ; Jerry and Edythe Belanger,
32 NLRB 1276.
2 Rosedale Passenger Lines, Inc., 85 NLRB 527; Peter Pan Bus Lines , 82 NLRB 830.
In O: Phillip Faucher, d /b/a Superior Bakery, 78 NLRB 1172, we excluded an employer's
uncle.